America

[B.C.G. JAG]

Bicycles banned!

[hamiltonjag]

Bicycles banned!

For once I agree with these Yanks.

 

Shame the same thing couldn't happen in Hamilton to get the wobbly ******** off the roads here.

 

*enter predictable indignant muesli-spray from the freeloading two-whelled menace brigade.

Edited June 19, 2010 by mod2
Offensive language

[B.C.G. JAG]

freeloading?

[arnus68]

freeloading?

 

 

I'd guess he means not paying road tax.

[B.C.G. JAG]

I'd guess he means not paying road tax.

 

Yes because pushbikes users should be made to pay for damage their bikes inflict on tarmacadam. Give me some actual cycle lanes, euro style, properly segregated from the traffic by a partition and I'd say there was possibly an argument there.

[hamiltonjag]

Yes because pushbikes users should be made to pay for damage their bikes inflict on tarmacadam. Give me some actual cycle lanes, euro style, properly segregated from the traffic by a partition and I'd say there was possibly an argument there.

Tell you what mate.... when cyclists start owning up to the damage they have caused to my car (one case in point I watched a lycra + sunglasses-wearing ****** scrape down the side of my car with his brake lever and by the time I got down to the car he'd courageously ******-off), once you freaks stop tearing along the pavements terrorising the old and the very young AND once they start displaying EVEN ONE ******* OUNCE OF ROAD SENSE WHEN THEY ACTUALLY USE THE ROAD, AND when they start paying road fund licence I might have more time for them..... but I seriously doubt it.

 

Cyclists... total *** menace

Edited June 19, 2010 by mod2
Swearing

[gianlucatoni]

Tell you what mate.... when cyclists start owning up to the damage they have caused to my car (one case in point I watched a lycra + sunglasses-wearing ***** scrape down the side of my car with his brake lever and by the time I got down to the car he'd courageously ******-off), once you freaks stop tearing along the pavements terrorising the old and the very young AND once they start displaying EVEN ONE ******* OUNCE OF ROAD SENSE WHEN THEY ACTUALLY USE THE ROAD, AND when they start paying road fund licence I might have more time for them..... but I seriously doubt it.

 

Cyclists... total *** menace

 

 

Och diddums my heart bleeds - your poor wee car all chipped and scraped - was it crying and in need of some TLC - did you get it hame and gie it a wee hug?! ... and I'll bet your hypocrisy knows no bounds - bet don't break the laws of the road (or that wee highway code book you've probably never read usually cos you know it all eh?!) daily in you 4 wheeled ****wagon running lights, braking late, parping your horn cos your a real big angry boy and driving at excess speed on any road you are on ... and finally I think you'll find if you do a bit of digging that the road fund licence goes way back to the late 1880's and was brought in for mechanically propelled vehicles to fund roads that 4 wheeled incompetents would wish to drive on.

Edited June 19, 2010 by mod2
Offensive language

[B.C.G. JAG]

Tell you what mate.... when cyclists start owning up to the damage they have caused to my car (one case in point I watched a lycra + sunglasses-wearing ***** scrape down the side of my car with his brake lever and by the time I got down to the car he'd courageously ******-off), once you freaks stop tearing along the pavements terrorising the old and the very young AND once they start displaying EVEN ONE ******* OUNCE OF ROAD SENSE WHEN THEY ACTUALLY USE THE ROAD, AND when they start paying road fund licence I might have more time for them..... but I seriously doubt it.

 

Cyclists... total *** menace

 

Since the car and our over reliance on it is heftily responsible for the demise of the health of our planet, the point of posting the article was to highlight how backwards it is for a town of only 100 people to ban bikes given that in such a small place they would be ideal for commuting. Surely you wouldn't disagree that encouraging bikes in small places like that makes a lot of environmental sense? However if you prefer to just wave your arms around angrily and get all red faced about how a cyclist scratched your car then so be it.

 

I dislike cyclists who a. Cycle on pavements (when it's not a designated cycle lane), b. Have either no knowledge or respect for the rules of the road and c. Take stupid risks. But whilst there are bad cyclists there are plenty of bad motorists too. And I've never heard of a cyclist killing a car driver before but there are plenty of examples of the reverse.

 

If your disproportionate vendetta against all cyclists resulting from a wee scratch to your car clouds your judgment on environmental policies so much then I would simply suggest that you calm down and try and see the bigger picture. Sadly however, I suspect that the way you flew completely off the handle there suggests you might be prone to a bit of road rage as well as keyboard rage.

 

edited to add: By the way, I also drive. I choose to cycle around Glasgow because I can and it makes more sense to me to do that. I use a car if going out of town. Just so you understand that it is actually possible for a motorist to sympathise with cyclists.

Edited June 19, 2010 by mod2

[arnus68]

I wonder if that was a random attack on the car by the lycra man or there was a reason for it. That's the beauty of number plates, maybe.

[Santana]

Cyclists should stay off the road and stick to the pavement. They're *********.

Edited June 19, 2010 by mod2
Swearing

[arnus68]

Cyclists should stay off the road and stick to the pavement. They're *********.

 

Pavements are ?

[Guest mod2]

Language Timothy! Let's see if everyone can make their points without swearing. A post full asterixes becomes pretty unreadable.

[hamiltonjag]

OK lets take these rants one at a time:

1.Och diddums my heart bleeds - your poor wee car all chipped and scraped - was it crying and in need of some TLC - did you get it hame and gie it a wee hug?! ... 2 and I'll bet your hypocrisy knows no bounds - bet don't break the laws of the road (or that wee highway code book you've probably never read usually cos you know it all eh?!) daily in you 4 wheeled ****wagon running lights, braking late, parping your horn cos your a real big angry boy and driving at excess speed on any road you are on ... 2. and finally I think you'll find if you do a bit of digging that the road fund licence goes way back to the late 1880's and was brought in for mechanically propelled vehicles to fund roads that 4 wheeled incompetents would wish to drive on.

1. Shows the level of cyclists. £800 worth of damage was caused. Not saying all cyclists are the same as you but a fair proportion seem to be as arrogant, uncaring and selfish.

2. I don't break the laws of the road. And I do know my Highway Code. I had to sit a driving test before I got set loose on the public highway unlike you.

3. I fail to see your point.

1.Since the car and our over reliance on it is heftily responsible for the demise of the health of our planet, the point of posting the article was to highlight how backwards it is for a town of only 100 people to ban bikes given that in such a small place they would be ideal for commuting. Surely you wouldn't disagree that encouraging bikes in small places like that makes a lot of environmental sense? However if you prefer to just wave your arms around angrily and get all red faced about how a cyclist scratched your car then so be it.

 

2. I dislike cyclists who a. Cycle on pavements (when it's not a designated cycle lane), b. Have either no knowledge or respect for the rules of the road and c. Take stupid risks. But whilst there are bad cyclists there are plenty of bad motorists too. And I've never heard of a cyclist killing a car driver before but there are plenty of examples of the reverse.

 

3.If your disproportionate vendetta against all cyclists resulting from a wee scratch to your car clouds your judgment on environmental policies so much then I would simply suggest that you calm down and try and see the bigger picture. Sadly however, I suspect that the way you flew completely off the handle there suggests you might be prone to a bit of road rage as well as keyboard rage.

 

edited to add: By the way, I also drive. I choose to cycle around Glasgow because I can and it makes more sense to me to do that. I use a car if going out of town. Just so you understand that it is actually possible for a motorist to sympathise with cyclists.

1. I wouldn't disagree with your point tbh. And btw I'm not getting red-faced about it. However judging by the ranting response from the cyclists here I imagine they're getting quite red-faced (never mind lads you'll reach climax soon and you can give your wrists a wee break

2. That makes sense and I agree. However your point about cyclists not killing car drivers and vice-versa is a wee bit ludicrous. Not a question of intent really is it? And while there may be a lot of incompetent drivers out there at least everyone knows that at some point their competence has been tested... unlike cyclists.

3. Like I said (if you care to re-read) only one example. I can also give examples of friends and family sustaining injury from cyclists bombing down pavements. How many examples would it take to make cyclists accept the validity of what I'm trying to say without resorting to infantile slagging? And by the way I am not prone to road rage and as I said earlier I am not angry. I do however recognise these allegations are designed to deflect attention from cyclists weak argument.

I wonder if that was a random attack on the car by the lycra man or there was a reason for it. That's the beauty of number plates, maybe.

From what I saw it was a guy on a bike who lost control of it whilst trying to rerieve something from the back of his t-shirt. Would be a great idea to have number plates on bikes..... and a cycling ban for the majority who haven't a clue how or where to cycle legally.

[hamiltonjag]

Aplogies to Moderator.

 

However is an "f" followed by an "E" then a "ck" swearing? If so, apologies again

[Guest mod2]

Aplogies to Moderator.

 

However is an "f" followed by an "E" then a "ck" swearing? If so, apologies again

 

This thread got a bit overloaded with obscenities. Some considerably worse than others. There was a quite a number of words in that post where one letter was changed in order to avoid detection by the swear filter where the original word is still obvious.

[B.C.G. JAG]

I use both a car and a bike so I see things from both sides. Whilst I really dislike cyclists being on pavements, one of the reasons some do it is because of the lack of respect, and more importantly space, given to them by cars. Motorists need to realise that they share the road with other vehicles. I find that the drivers who get annoyed by bikes also tend to get annoyed by buses and cut them up in a similar fashion. There's a lack of tolerance for other road users.

 

I would agree with the idea of cyclists being licensed. I am amazed at the lack of understanding one of my work colleagues (who also cycles) has of the highway code. They actually didn't understand the concept of 'right of way'. But then, these days, we need new motorists to be properly instructed in how to pass cyclists safely. Cyclists in turn need to learn how antisocial it is to cycle on a footpath.

 

I recently screamed dog's abuse at a teenager who was bombing it down the street and nearly went right into my wee kid. When I not-so-politely suggested that he use the road, the teen told me that his wheel radius was too small to legally be on the road (it was one of those mini-BMX things they do tricks on). But if it's got wheels, and you're over 12, then as far as I know, you should be on the road. Maybe someone can tell me otherwise?

 

I've been cut up and run off the road countless times but inconsiderate and ignorant motorists. I would desperately love to have the kind of segregated cycle lanes I've seen in Copenhagen and Eindhoven. There are some such lanes now around the Gaelic School in Finnieston, but typically they're only on a handful of streets and then just stop.

 

Motorists nearly all speed and so their braking distances are poorer than they realise. Very few actually pay any attention to the cyclists only box at traffic lights. We need cycle lanes and cycle only lights. A green light that gives bikes a two second 'wobble' headstart. Put these things in place, bring in licensing, enforce safety and hi-viz clothing and I will gladly pay a small tax for cycle only lanes.

Edited June 19, 2010 by B.C.G. JAG

[hamiltonjag]

I use both a car and a bike so I see things from both sides. Whilst I really dislike cyclists being on pavements, one of the reasons some do it is because of the lack of respect, and more importantly space, given to them by cars. Motorists need to realise that they share the road with other vehicles. I find that he drivers who get annoyed by bikes also tend to get annoyed by buses and cut them up in a similar fashion. There's a lack of tolerance for other road users.

 

I would agree with the idea of cyclists being licensed. I am amazed at the lack of understanding one of my work colleagues who also cycles has of the highway code. The actually didn't understand the concept of 'right of way'. But then, these days, we need new motorists to be properly instructed in how to pass cyclists safely. Cyclists in turn need to learn how antisocial it is to cycle on a footpath.

 

I recently screamed dog's abuse at a teenager who was bombing it down the street and nearly went right into my wee kid. When I not so politely suggested he use the road, the teen told me that his tyres were too small to legally be on the road (it was one of those mini-BMX things they do tricks on). But if it's got wheels, and you're over 12, then as far as I know, you should be on the road.

 

I've been cut up and run off the road countless times but inconsiderate and ignorant motorists. I would desperately love to have the kind of segregated cycle lanes I've seen in Copenhagen and Eindhoven. There are some such lanes now around the Gaelic School in Finnieston, but typically they're only on a handful of streets and then just stop.

 

Motorists nearly all speed and so their braking distances are poorer than they realise. Very few actually pay any attention to the cyclists only box at traffic lights. We need cycle lanes and cycle only lights. A green light that gives bikes a two second 'wobble' headstart. Put these things in place and bring in licensing and I will gladly pay a small tax.

I'd go even further and say I wouldn't mind an increase in road tax if it went towards setting-up cycle lanes and cycle lights.... anything to get the (majority of) clueless cyclists off the pavements and separated from other traffic on the roads. Maybe if cyclists were made to take a competence test before going on the road they'd be a lot less flipping irritating and wouldn't behave like the shocking cads they are.

[gianlucatoni]

OK lets take these rants one at a time:

 

1. Shows the level of cyclists. £800 worth of damage was caused. Not saying all cyclists are the same as you but a fair proportion seem to be as arrogant, uncaring and selfish.

2. I don't break the laws of the road. And I do know my Highway Code. I had to sit a driving test before I got set loose on the public highway unlike you.

3. I fail to see your point.

 

 

 

ok let's have a look at you throwing chuckies in a greenhouse shall we

 

1. Rant! you say - absurd! - pot-kettle-black eh! check out your original capital letter slabberfest posted by yourself matey.

 

2. Damage caused - planet keeps spinning - no-one hurt but a bit of metal

 

3. can you quantify a cyclist's arrogance, lack of care and selfishness by looking or is it just something we all have in your eyes - what utter nonsense

 

4. you don't break the laws of the road - mmmm what a whopper! - now I and everyone else know you're lying!

 

5. Unlike you ... wrong again - I've been driving for 22 years and riding a bike for 35 so you're wrong again - jumping to conclusions rather hastily again - road tax up again at the end of the month - damage is done by motorised vehicles with large mass and not cyclists on a <20kg bike (want me to spell out the laws of physics for you?)

 

6. failing to see the point is your prerogative *abusive comment deleted*

 

7 remember mirror-signal-manoeuvre next time you strap yourself into your ****wagon!

[hamiltonjag]

ok let's have a look at you throwing chuckies in a greenhouse shall we

 

1. Rant! you say - absurd! - pot-kettle-black eh! check out your original capital letter slabberfest* < bit of an un-necessary insult posted by yourself matey.

 

2. Damage caused - planet keeps spinning - no-one hurt but a bit of metal *And a fair wedge out of my wallet but hey-ho eh?

3. can you quantify a cyclist's arrogance I see it every day, lack of care and selfishness by looking or is it just something we all have in your eyes - what utter nonsense < in your humble opinion

 

4. you don't break the laws of the road - mmmm what a whopper! - now I and everyone else know you're lying! Really? You KNOW this do you? Hmmmmmm I call that arrogance

5. Unlike you ... wrong again - I've been driving for 22 years and riding a bike for 35 so you're wrong again - jumping to conclusions < and you aren't? rather hastily again - road tax up again at the end of the month - damage is done by motorised vehicles with large mass and not cyclists on a <20kg bike (want me to spell out the laws of physics for you?) < Oh yes please... let me marvel at your intellect.... arrogance. Shall I point out that lorries and buses are heavier than cars?

 

6. failing to see the point is your prerogative *abusive comment deleted* Mod.... is this not overly abusive? And totally un-called-for?

 

7 remember mirror-signal-manoeuvre next time you strap yourself into your ****wagon! I always do. Isn't that last word quite abusive too?

[arnus68]

I'm not getting involved in above but probably 99.999999999% of drivers under 70 (loads of them too) speed and break various other rules of the road every time they drive. I know I do.

[hamiltonjag]

I'm not getting involved in above but probably 99.999999999% of drivers under 70 (loads of them too) speed and break various other rules of the road every time they drive. I know I do.

Fair comment mate. But I don't think the other poster was right to blindly assume that I do. That was the point I was trying to make. I suppose yer man was maybe trying to point out that not all cyclists are ummmm useless afficionados of auto-erotic activity, and that's fair enough too. I met one cyclist who was actually awright in the heid.

[gianlucatoni]

I'm not getting involved in above but probably 99.999999999% of drivers under 70 (loads of them too) speed and break various other rules of the road every time they drive. I know I do.

 

 

It would appear that hamilton jag is the exception to the rule and is the 0.000000001% of the populace of the UK that doesn't ever do anything wrong in his poor wee scratched motor ... mathematically with a driving population of 30million in the UK (x the 0.000000001% HJ agreed and though was fair comment from arnus) this work out at only 0.03 of a whole person obeying the laws of the road ... applying the laws of rounding it would appear that such a person doesn't exist and therefore backs up the theory (rather tenuously) that HJ is a law breaker and a bit of a fibber.

But don't let the facts get in the way of one of your a 1-sided arguments HJ eh?!

[hamiltonjag]

It would appear that hamilton jag is the exception to the rule and is the 0.000000001% of the populace of the UK that doesn't ever do anything wrong in his poor wee scratched motor ... mathematically with a driving population of 30million in the UK (x the 0.000000001% HJ agreed and though was fair comment from arnus) this work out at only 0.03 of a whole person obeying the laws of the road ... applying the laws of rounding it would appear that such a person doesn't exist and therefore backs up the theory (rather tenuously) that HJ is a law breaker and a bit of a fibber.

But don't let the facts get in the way of one of your a 1-sided arguments HJ eh?!

No point arguing with a blatant troll.

 

You are absolutely right about everything (at least in your own mind) And I have now decided to ignore your snide remarks. You were asking about arrogance earlier?

1. Find a mirror.

2. Look in it.

[arnus68]

Must be the recent warmish weather. Really acrimonious on the site today. Chill.

[hamiltonjag]

Must be the recent warmish weather. Really acrimonious on the site today. Chill.

lol yeah.... agreed, time to chill.